Add to Flipboard Magazine.

yeah, "Jesus," whateverSo there are three “Christian” pastors who wanted the courts to invalidate the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act because “thought crimes,” so they filed suit with the total asshole Thomas More Law Center, saying basically “WAH, Orwell and stuff! Animal Farm! Two legs bad! We will not be able to urge the stoning of homosexuals as prescribed in Leviticus!” and the court was all “yeah, idiots, you do not have standing to sue to overturn this law unless you are actually wanting to drag a man behind your car? You do not actually want to drag a man behind your car, do you? You just want to say hateful shit? STILL PROTECTED, and you got no standing to sue.” (The court did describe the “Christian” pastors’ speech as “hateful” before noting that about two thirds of the country was at that precise moment standing in line at Chick-fil-A and stuffing the word in the memory hole.) (That’s right bitchez, we got yer Orwell hanging!)

Take it away, Talking Points Memo!

But the appeals court found that the plaintiffs had “not alleged any actual intent” to cause bodily injury to any gay individuals, pointing out that the pastors explicitly denounced “crimes of violence perpetrated against innocent individuals.”

The Hate Crimes Act, the appeals court ruled, “does not prohibit Plaintiffs’ proposed course of hateful speech” and said they “can’t quite pinpoint what it is they want to say that could subject them to prosecution under the Hate Crimes Act.” [Editor’s note: an updated version of the opinion removes the word “hateful” from the opinion, but a cached version makes clear that the original opinion included the word “hateful.”)

Even if they quoted Leviticus 20:13, which called for men who have sex with one another to be put to death, “they have not alleged any intention to do more than merely quote it,” which wouldn’t be unlawful under the Hate Crimes Act, the appeals court ruled.

“If the Hate Crimes Act prohibits only willfully causing bodily injury and Plaintiffs are not planning to willfully injure anybody, then what is their complaint? Plaintiffs answer that they fear wrongful prosecution and conviction under the Act. Not only is that fear misplaced, it’s inadequate to generate a case or controversy the federal courts can hear,” the appeals court ruled.

You know who else got put to death in Leviticus? EVERYONE. For EVERYTHING. Like, “Sassed your mom? Sassed your slave owner? Cut your beard and whatnot? Ate a lobster? Didn’t finish your peas? THAT’S A STONING!” Good times, Leviticus. Good Christian times.

Better luck next time, bigots!



Previous articleRafalca's Magical Olympics, Day One: Rafalca Losing To Some Dancing Horses, Beating Others
Next articleObama Holocausting White People With Negative Ads, Bush Cousin Says In Excellent Buzzfeed Piece